The best compromise would be: both in and make it all optional. I don't mind them making games more open to different crowds, but we should be able to choose between what we want to see on map/UI.
But for some reason that is not an option, there is no middle ground.
I'm..... kind of in the middle on this. While I do lament the streamlining and dumbing down of games (especially inventories, alternate paths or conversation choices in RPGs), I do kind of like having map markers and more "at a glance" quest information. Just how I prefer dungeon crawlers with automated mappers, rather than the "classic" hardcore manual mapping... or, even the uberhardcore graph paper
While playing Witcher I was just randomly walking into novigrad when I heard someone calling for me. There was no quest indicator nor any other indicator on screen, yet I saw that one magician with a familiar name was put on stakes to be burned alive. So following my instict I killed the guards and rescued the guy. It felt SO good that the game offers something like this without absolutely any marker. I guess a lot of players just missed this opportunity, because if you normally mess with city guard you are dead.
Another interesting thing that happened without marker: I was casually walking through a village and suddenly two guys start running off. I follow them and come to a town meeting where they discuss some stuff and a quest emerges.
If the developers actually have enough time and care, they can make most of the things happen without fake markers.. but it means a LOT of effort. F.e. in W3 most stuff you can collect from somewhere is not visible until you examine that object... So some sort of UI assistance is required but they should make it optional so that "hardcore" players also can have fun
As a member of the antiHUD congress and knight of the noFOLLOW, I share all the pain. I always try to disable practically everything that spoils things in my games when possible, unless it's something really helpful - which considering nowadays wonky UI designed to please GPSmen, never happens xD
(I didn't find the courage to click on the link though so I used the pic alone as a reference)
What's the point of "early as possible" on a project that comes from a company that made the Ark abomination? Everyone knows that at the very least, it will be a buggy mess and terrible gameplay.
because gamers are the most retarded consumers, survival + openworld = buy no matter what, seasons passes and dlc buy, have t oget my Steam 5K-10K total game collection badge buy buy..
I got my 5k badge, but I sure as shit don't pre-order or even thought about getting Atlas. :>
I was surprised how that game got so much hype with the MMO crowd. People on MMORPG.com were talking about it like it was the greatest thing coming out, same on the Amazon MMO and WoW. I was thinking: didn't they see how shit Ark was.
Kids and YA today were groomed to enjoy games with no story, just twitch action. They're the audience paying for the junk that the gaming publishers push.
Because gamers buy anything with minimal hype, ill bet @Rage is hyped for diablo immortal you guys are just haters that don't like fun.
In all seriousness Blizz/Diablo > i don't think they are capable of making a good ARPG anymore. Bliz make games for derps now and for quite some time I might add. I like how this time around they literally bought some Chinese shit mobile game, couldnt even be bothered re-doing the UI and will probably bank 100 million of derplo gamers.
Signature/Avatar nuking: none (can be changed in your profile)
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
